Acts20.com

There is a Dangerous New Trend in the Church of God where Pastors are selecting their own successor. This violates the Minutes of the General Assembly and prevents the State Overseer or local congregation from having a voice on the matter.

I was not aware of this, but I agree this is a frightening trend. This could be considered the evil twin of another trend I've seen in denominations whose minutes and by-laws call for each congregation to have a strong deacon board. While I have greatly sympathized in the past with pastors who have had to deal with unreasonable boards, in latter years I've noticed the tide turning. Now it seems more common for a controlling pastor to find a way to drive from the board those deacons that might question their agenda and see to it they are replaced with more compliant board members. This trend weakens a very important system of checks and balances. If what you are saying is true, then the trend towards a pastoral totalitarianism is growing, such a what dominates much of the UPCI

Pastors choosing their own successors cannot happen in the COG unless for some reason the COG does not have deeded control of the building and property. This has been the case in some COG's.

true Mitch Maloney picked his successorThe COG picked Steve Lowery to go to National CO

Steve was already an associate pastor at National at the time. Not to mention, it made sense More of Him...less of me.twitter.com/camiracle77www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name

I don't really see this as a dangerous thing. The pastor is not really selecting his successor, since that can only be done by the AB. But I think it makes sense to allow the pastor's input, especially if he is a long time pastor or started the church. If a pastor is retiring, I'm sure he would have a lot more peace about that if he knew he was leaving in the church in capable hands, with someone who has a similar vision that could take up the reins and run with it.In the end it is the AB's decision since he is the only one that can appoint pastors, correct More of Him...less of me.twitter.com/camiracle77www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name

Especially since Copeland has already prophesied a 10-fold almost immediate increase, then another 10-fold increase later on. Of course! And of course, that happened way after Steve became pastor More of Him...less of me.twitter.com/camiracle77www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name

As to the original statement in this post, it is not possible without the State Overseer attaching his approval to it, all pastoral appointments are made by the State Overseer.As to the changes in how this actually works in the CoG, in many instances it would be good if it were the common practice, so long as the church body was given a voice, and the AB did not have a valid doubt about the next guy.There used to be a pastoral preference vote taken every 2 years at every church: Keep him or change? Pastors hated it. It went to 4 years. People they hadn't seen in 3 1/2 years would show up on the day of the vote. Other pastors with friends in that church would let them know that if there WERE a change, they would gladly offer themselves. They hated it worse than before. Now, some member has to go to the AB and request a vote be taken where he will be asked if he has talked to anyone else about it. (Yes: Sowing discord. No: Think highly of yourself don't you?)Pastors are staying longer. People not happy with the new one no longer wait for the next, they go somewhere else, maybe another CoG, maybe not. Visitors that like the new pastor stay. The church then, over time, becomes much more tuned in with the man, rather than the organization. Pastors have a strong sense of this. Churches using various methods to remove evidence that they ARE CoG without exception go that way under the direction of such pastoral leadership.I am saying there are pros and cons to ANY method.But in a system where a man has stayed a long time, and where a vast majority of the regular attenders have true confidence in him, enough to overlook often glaring faults for the glaring benefits, then it makes a lot of sense for that man to give some thought to who would be best to replace him should the time actually have come for him to vacate the job.

The Overseer lives several hours away and has probably never been to the church and doesn't know the people, but he is far more qualified to present candidates than the outgoing pastor. The Overseer knows what they need; the style of preaching, style of administration, and ministry priorities of the congregation. He has probably already heard from the disgruntled clerk who can guide him as to what the congregation needs and wants.

Nicely done FGM!